[ANN] Metriplex (MPX) — The first blockchain with fractal identity | Live on Bas

[NTellez]

METRIPLEX (MPX)
Order from chaos

The first blockchain where your identity is a geometric shape, not a number.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

[ WEBSITE ] https://metriplexmpx.xyz
[ GITHUB ] https://github.com/NTellezM/Metriplex
[ WHITEPAPER ] https://github.com/NTellezM/Metriplex/blob/main/docs/whitepaper.md
[ CONTRACT (Base) ] 0x22D3f414438556d1B071cCfE52513d4d829400fd
[ UNISWAP V4 ] https://app.uniswap.org/swap?chain=base&outputCurrency=0x22D3f414438556d1B071cCfE52513d4d829400fd
[ BASESCAN ] https://basescan.org/token/0x22D3f414438556d1B071cCfE52513d4d829400fd

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

WHAT IS METRIPLEX?

In Bitcoin and Ethereum, your identity is a 256-bit integer.
In Metriplex, your private key is an Iterated Function System (IFS) — a set of geometric contractions that define a unique fractal attractor in ℝ⁴.

Your public key is not a point on an elliptic curve. It is a 4×4×4 moment tensor M₃ that encodes the statistical geometry of your attractor. Uniqueness is guaranteed by the Kruskal-Comon theorem.

Code:

Traditional:  identity = hash(random_number)
Metriplex:    identity = M₃(attractor(IFS))

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

ZK PROOF SYSTEM

Every transaction includes a zero-knowledge proof that the sender controls an IFS whose attractor satisfies 8 geometric criteria simultaneously (c1–c8 composite criterion). Forgery requires solving the Inverse IFS Problem — structurally distinct from problems attacked by Shor's algorithm.

This is not lattice-based and not hash-based. It is a genuinely new hardness assumption grounded in fractal geometry and tensor decomposition (NP-hard, Hillar & Lim 2013).

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

TOKENOMICS

Supply:     21,000,000 MPX — fixed forever, like Bitcoin
Network:    Base (Ethereum L2)
Exchange:   Uniswap V4 (ETH/MPX, 1% fee)
Bridge:     Bidirectional Metriplex ↔ Ethereum (live)

Distribution:
40% (8.4M)  → Uniswap V4 liquidity
60% (12.6M) → Founder / development / future listings

No investors. No private sale. No vesting. No presale.
Block reward: 50 MPX per block (native chain mining).

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

ARCHITECTURE

Code:

┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│        Metriplex Layer 1 (native)        │
│                                          │
│  Fractal Identity ↔ ZK Proof ↔ Consensus │
│  (IFS + M₃ tensor)  (c1–c8)  (slot PoS) │
└──────────────────┬──────────────────────┘
                   │ relayer.py
┌──────────────────▼──────────────────────┐
│         Ethereum / Base (EVM L2)         │
│   Metriplex.sol (ERC-20) + Uniswap V4   │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘

Run a node in one line:

Code:

curl -sSL https://metriplexmpx.xyz/install.sh | bash

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

ROADMAP

Phase 1 — COMPLETE
✓ Native Layer 1 blockchain with fractal identity
✓ ZK proof system (c1–c8 composite criterion, 45 passing tests)
✓ Bidirectional bridge to Ethereum (live TX verified)
✓ MPX token on Base mainnet + Uniswap V4
✓ Open source — MIT / BUSL-1.1

Phase 2 — Q2 2026
→ 10+ external holders
→ CoinGecko listing
→ Liquidity pool $2,000+
→ Multi-node testnet

Phase 3 — Q3 2026
→ Rust rewrite of cryptographic core (4s → 40ms signing)
→ 100+ TPS demonstrated

Phase 4 — Q1 2027
→ Formal security audit of ZK criterion
→ arXiv paper: IFS as post-quantum primitive
→ CEX listing (Gate.io / MEXC)

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

LICENSE

Node, API, Bridge, Contracts: MIT
Cryptographic Core: BUSL-1.1 → MIT automatically on 2027-05-09
  (non-production use permitted: research, education, personal)
Whitepaper: CC BY 4.0

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetriplexMPX
Contact: metriplexmpx@gmail.com

"Order from chaos"

[NTellez]

I'm the solo developer behind Metriplex. Happy to answer any technical questions.

A bit of context on why I built this:

The motivation was purely mathematical. I was working on fractal geometry and realized that IFS attractors have a property that elliptic curves don't — the map from private key (IFS) to public key (M₃ tensor) has no known group structure. Shor's algorithm needs that structure to run its period-finding. Without it, the quantum attack doesn't have a clear entry point.

That's not a proof of quantum resistance. It's an observation. Turning it into a formal proof is one of the open problems I'm actively working on.

Some things I'd genuinely like feedback on:

1. The hardness assumption (IIFSP)
The security rests on the Inverse IFS Problem — given a tensor M₃, reconstruct the IFS that generated it. This reduces to symmetric tensor decomposition, which is NP-hard in the worst case (Hillar & Lim, 2013). But worst-case NP-hardness is not the same as cryptographic hardness. Has anyone worked on average-case hardness of tensor decomposition problems?

2. The ZK criterion
The c1-c8 composite criterion is empirically sound (0/9 adversarial attacks pass), but it hasn't been formally proven to be zero-knowledge in the sigma protocol sense. This is the next theoretical milestone before a formal paper.

3. Rust rewrite
The Python implementation signs transactions in ~4 seconds. The Rust target is <40ms via SIMD vectorization of the chaos game. If anyone has experience with SIMD in Rust for iterative numerical algorithms, I'd appreciate input on realistic targets for 50,000 iterations in 4D float64 space.

The full codebase is at https://github.com/NTellezM/Metriplex — core cryptography is BUSL-1.1 (non-production use free), everything else is MIT.

I'll be around to answer questions.